SCOTT COUNTY, Ind. — A whistleblower complaint alleges that the Scott County government is failing to apply its drug policies uniformly, raising concerns about the conduct of Circuit Court Judge Jason Mount.
Scott County Commissioner Adam Bomar confirmed that all employees are required to acknowledge a handbook that includes a drug policy. “Every new employee signs the handbook agreeing to adhere to these policies related to drug use,” Bomar stated.
However, recent emails reveal a situation that could undermine that assurance. An employee under Judge Mount’s supervision tested positive for THC, the psychoactive component in marijuana, yet appeared to face no disciplinary repercussions. According to the documents, after the initial positive test, the employee was set for further testing by the Scott County Auditor’s Office, but Judge Mount intervened.
In an email addressed to the auditor, Mount indicated he would not send the employee for testing. He stated, “I will not be sending the person today… If I decide next week that we as an administration are continuing to voluntarily participate in this policy, I will let you know.” He also noted that the employee had not been informed of the request for further testing.
Bomar pointed out that, as of now, the employee remains on the job without facing disciplinary action. “The employee is still there,” he said, emphasizing that no consequences have been applied despite subsequent attempts to administer drug tests, which went unanswered by Judge Mount.
While Bomar acknowledged that the county’s drug policy applies to most employees, it does not extend to elected officials, such as judges and commissioners. Nevertheless, Bomar expressed concern that overlooking these violations could compromise the integrity of the justice system.
Bomar has escalated his concerns by sending the whistleblower complaint to both the Indiana Disciplinary Commission and the Indiana Judicial Qualifications Commission. In his letter, he noted that Judge Mount has been involved in adjudicating cases related to drug offenses, questioning the judge’s impartiality and credibility given the current situation. “His willingness to overlook drug policy violations within his own administration raises serious questions about his fitness to serve on the bench,” he wrote.
The commissioner labeled the situation a broader ethical failure in county leadership, stating, “The evidence submitted with this letter paints a clear and disturbing picture of ethical failures, policy violations, and potential abuse of judicial power.” He emphasized that such actions not only contradict established ethical guidelines but also damage public trust in the judicial process.
Attempts to reach Judge Mount for comments—including phone calls, emails, and a visit to his office—have gone unanswered.
This report was automatically generated by Open AI, and the individuals, facts, circumstances, and story may contain inaccuracies. Requests for removal, retraction, or correction can be made by emailing contact@publiclawlibrary.org.